There was 0% chance Ukraine could take back Crimea. Anybody who thought / believed / read that didn't have a clue tbh. This is still much better than anybody could have hoped. Doomsday scenarios in the past have been Russian tanks in France in 1 week if they ever attacked Europe.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
NM
Full Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2011
- Messages
- 12,351
The comparision he made was Wilt.. who was around then but anyway no need to derail this threadThere hasn’t been a US draft in nearly 50 years.
Water Melon
Guest
There will be no peace unless Ukraine gets all its territories back. Make no mistake, Russia is not winning this at all. The West will continue their support, while Russia will continue to bleed.
So you bring up something from over half a century ago, not related to either country and that was on topic?Only because of the power of the US military, but let's keep this on topic
While this war is inflicting catastrophic losses on the Russian army (for example the other day the visually confirmed number of Russian MBT losses exceeded 800, which is the stock of UK, France, Germany, Italy combined) in levels not seen since WW2, I think there’s been a severe underestimation by many analysts of the sheer depth in terms of usable materiel that they possess and what their breaking point would be.
Supply and ammunition depots as well as artillery pieces go up in smoke on the daily, yet so far that has not translated in a reduction in the Russian army’s ability to pepper Ukrainian positions almost non-stop.
And while I still believe that the Russian losses won’t be sustainable for too long, the prevailing question now is how long can Ukraine sustain for and will their breaking point be reached much earlier than the Russians. Not just in terms of materiel but morale and manpower too. By all accounts the battle for Severodonetsk was very bloody with at the very least many 100s, if not a few thousand, Ukrainian defenders dead in the process.
It’s a grim attritional war now and Ukraine will need all the help they can get if they are to survive it. Both to bridge the deficit in guns and to boost flagging morale.
Supply and ammunition depots as well as artillery pieces go up in smoke on the daily, yet so far that has not translated in a reduction in the Russian army’s ability to pepper Ukrainian positions almost non-stop.
And while I still believe that the Russian losses won’t be sustainable for too long, the prevailing question now is how long can Ukraine sustain for and will their breaking point be reached much earlier than the Russians. Not just in terms of materiel but morale and manpower too. By all accounts the battle for Severodonetsk was very bloody with at the very least many 100s, if not a few thousand, Ukrainian defenders dead in the process.
It’s a grim attritional war now and Ukraine will need all the help they can get if they are to survive it. Both to bridge the deficit in guns and to boost flagging morale.
stevoc
Full Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2011
- Messages
- 20,401
There's no doubt Ukraine came out better in the early part of this invasion. Russia got bogged down in incompetence and they also underestimated the Ukranians. They planned to use similar tactics to the US in Iraq, trying a swift invasion to take the Capital quickly and failed miserably.I was one of the ones that believed the media. I really thought that it would be a walk for ukranians even with a chance to dispute crimea
Sadly it seems they can't win this. The only one that seems that can is russia. But probably not even them in the long run
But it was never going to be an easy win for Ukraine and retaking Crimea always seemed unlikely. Since the Russians retreated back to the Donbas region near the Russian border and changed tactics to a slow march, scorched earth artillery bombardment (50,000 rounds per day) they have been making gradual progress. Who knows how long they can keep this up but without an advanced Airforce there's not much Ukraine can do to combat these tactics. It's why they've been desperate for NATO countries to send them longer range missile systems.
NotThatSoph
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2019
- Messages
- 3,787
No, @NM didn't bring up anything. @RedDevilQuebecois said that making Fedotov do his mandatory military service (which, for now, does not mean that he'll be sent to Ukraine against his will I think), would be like the US drafting Chamberlain when that could possibly mean sending him to Vietnam. Unless there's something that makes Ali fundamentally different from Fedotov and Chamberlain in this context, then it of course makes perfect sense to mention that the US did try to draft Ali, who in that case could not refuse to go to Vietnam if so ordered.So you bring up something from over half a century ago, not related to either country and that was on topic?
Last edited:
Beans
Full Member
I wouldn't exactly call that news.
"Things shall continue as they have gone."
"Things shall continue as they have gone."
tomaldinho1
Full Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
- Messages
- 17,795
I mean...is anyone surprised. Is anyone also going to be surprised when Russia attacks through Belarus?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
TwoSheds
More sheds (and tiles) than you, probably
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 12,980
Not sure Belarus can afford to join the war really and nor am I sure the Russians can afford to open up a new front. Status quo is just about working for Russia atm so they'll carry on. It oil hits $380 a barrel then they might just carry on for a long time.I mean...is anyone surprised. Is anyone also going to be surprised when Russia attacks through Belarus?
tomaldinho1
Full Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
- Messages
- 17,795
Is it not Russia who has the issue here? Ukraine realistically isn't going to take back all that territory in the short term - I doubt they're even planning for that - they'll surely be fortifying defensive lines further back, giving themselves as much time as possible for NATO artillery and ammo and also sanctions to keep working. Russia is the one who needs more time in the short term, it's clear their new slow and steady approach with artillery overkill is working albeit at a huge human cost. Russia could hold the Donbas for years but if Ukraine can hold out elsewhere, an economically crippled Russia will slowly become less and less capable of holding Ukrainian occupied territory.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
From Konrad Muzyka - if Ukrainę does not counterattack by the end of September the longer term trends will favour Russia, given the Autumn rains and hindering of movement that will cause.
ShoePolish
Full Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2013
- Messages
- 1,129
Thing is, Lukashenko is increasingly reliant on his security forces.And on January they said there is no threat of Russian invasion
Back when they had riots over election fraud, his forces couldn't handle it and had to get russian help to suppress them.
If he makes an unpopular move like jumping into russian war, that might reignite the riots, and this time he would be even more shorthanded.
shamans
Thinks you can get an STD from flirting.
Russia wont require much to hold onto Donbas or Crimea. If they don't enjoy Russia support yet, they will soon employing tactics similar to India or Israel where local populations are sent in massive numbers for settlements.Is it not Russia who has the issue here? Ukraine realistically isn't going to take back all that territory in the short term - I doubt they're even planning for that - they'll surely be fortifying defensive lines further back, giving themselves as much time as possible for NATO artillery and ammo and also sanctions to keep working. Russia is the one who needs more time in the short term, it's clear their new slow and steady approach with artillery overkill is working albeit at a huge human cost. Russia could hold the Donbas for years but if Ukraine can hold out elsewhere, an economically crippled Russia will slowly become less and less capable of holding Ukrainian occupied territory.
tomaldinho1
Full Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
- Messages
- 17,795
It won't really matter - if Ukraine can last long enough and then has enough artillery (this is wayyyy down the line) to push back, no one will stay there. Point being, the rainy season coming up in Ukraine this year doesn't really matter if the war lasts years. Russia are the ones who need at some point in the near future to say they have 'succeeded' whereas Ukraine just needs to survive. That's unless you buy the western rhetoric that they can push Russia back short term which just seems ridiculous given they are a smaller force and we know, pre NATO artillery, it was 15 to 1 in terms of long range artillery and whilst it might be closer now it's still nowhere near equal.Russia wont require much to hold onto Donbas or Crimea. If they don't enjoy Russia support yet, they will soon employing tactics similar to India or Israel where local populations are sent in massive numbers for settlements.
I don’t think the target is to match them in current Russian numbers. You can’t increase the UA artillery 15 fold. That would take a monumental effort from western militaries and significant Ukrainian manpower to train units knowledgeable enough to man and maintain them.That's unless you buy the western rhetoric that they can push Russia back short term which just seems ridiculous given they are a smaller force and we know, pre NATO artillery, it was 15 to 1 in terms of long range artillery and whilst it might be closer now it's still nowhere near equal.
I think the target here is to increase numbers of course but mostly to tip the balance by providing more quality than quantity. And maybe by doubling UA artillery in the process, the ratio only changes from 15-to-1 to 8-to-1. But if their accuracy and range are superior they can shoot and scoot, shoot and scoot. Inflicting heavy losses, destroying morale and reducing the numerical advantage in the process. Meanwhile saboteurs work to destroy ammo depos and supply lines.
What works in the Ukrainian favor is they have an endless supply of arms from the west, along with pretty solid morale. Both things the Russians don't have the luxury of.It won't really matter - if Ukraine can last long enough and then has enough artillery (this is wayyyy down the line) to push back, no one will stay there. Point being, the rainy season coming up in Ukraine this year doesn't really matter if the war lasts years. Russia are the ones who need at some point in the near future to say they have 'succeeded' whereas Ukraine just needs to survive. That's unless you buy the western rhetoric that they can push Russia back short term which just seems ridiculous given they are a smaller force and we know, pre NATO artillery, it was 15 to 1 in terms of long range artillery and whilst it might be closer now it's still nowhere near equal.
VorZakone
What would Kenny G do?
- Joined
- May 9, 2013
- Messages
- 32,947
For how long though, there've already been reports coming out of desertions and demoralization.What works in the Ukrainian favor is they have an endless supply of arms from the west, along with pretty solid morale. Both things the Russians don't have the luxury of.
There will always be some, but collectively, the Ukrainians are light years ahead of the Russians in the morale department, which wont be insignificant as the war grinds on.For how long though, there've already been reports coming out of desertions and demoralization.
Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
I think that is attributable to the changed nature of the fighting, and you are right to raise a concern. The Ukrainian daily death rate amongst soldiers is over half of the daily death rate for the British Armed Forces in WW2.For how long though, there've already been reports coming out of desertions and demoralization.
Probably the parallel that comes to mind for me would be the British Army in WW1 in the Battle of 3rd Ypres (Passchendaele) in the Summer of 1917 and the 100 days offensive to end the war in 1918.
Passchendaele today is a byword for mindless slaughter and sacrifice in the mud, and the grinding attritional warfare and artillery duels conducted over a small land area sapped the British Army's morale (much like the concentration of artillery in the Donbass must be doing now).
The 100 Days Offensive is regarded as one of the greatest military achievements of the BEF, with morale so high that soldiers were willing to take near suicidal risks on a daily basis - casualty rates in 1918 were higher than in Flanders in 1917.
tomaldinho1
Full Member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2015
- Messages
- 17,795
That’s exactly my point. No chance Ukraine will short term be able to match them, their aim will be to simply grind them to some kind of stalemate. Hence why the rainy season kind of helps Ukraine, Russia is the aggressor here.I don’t think the target is to match them in current Russian numbers. You can’t increase the UA artillery 15 fold. That would take a monumental effort from western militaries and significant Ukrainian manpower to train units knowledgeable enough to man and maintain them.
I think the target here is to increase numbers of course but mostly to tip the balance by providing more quality than quantity. And maybe by doubling UA artillery in the process, the ratio only changes from 15-to-1 to 8-to-1. But if their accuracy and range are superior they can shoot and scoot, shoot and scoot. Inflicting heavy losses, destroying morale and reducing the numerical advantage in the process. Meanwhile saboteurs work to destroy ammo depos and supply lines.
Frosty
Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Simbo
Full Member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,228
Don’t give up just yet, it’s took the Russians two months throwing everything they have on one front, after retreating from everywhere else, to finally make a bit of progress, at god only knows what cost.I was one of the ones that believed the media. I really thought that it would be a walk for ukranians even with a chance to dispute crimea
Sadly it seems they can't win this. The only one that seems that can is russia. But probably not even them in the long run
These deserted towns of rubble don’t really gain them anything strategically. As much as can be said for some media over hyping Ukraines chances after their successes, the same can be said here.
On another note…HIMARS go brrrrr. It doesn’t appear these things have been overhyped at all.
shamans
Thinks you can get an STD from flirting.
There will always be some, but collectively, the Ukrainians are light years ahead of the Russians in the morale department, which wont be insignificant as the war grinds on.
I don't know why people bother trying to understand if the morale is high or low. Our guess is as good as any really. I also don't think it matters so much in modern warfare. The technology is so high the man behind the machine hardly matters unless they are completely demoralized or something.
Enigma_87
You know who
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2008
- Messages
- 27,648
Problem is - the war is on Ukrainian territory. Putin doesn’t care what number of casualties he will throw in, whilst with the war going on it’s pretty normal many more to try to get far away from the natives.What works in the Ukrainian favor is they have an endless supply of arms from the west, along with pretty solid morale. Both things the Russians don't have the luxury of.
Not only does it matter, it can be pivotal in how a war is executed. Much of the fighting on the eastern front is in close quarters - town by town, street by street. Ukrainians motivated to fight and die to protect their country is therefore far more powerful than Russian kids being threatened with jail if they don't want to fight in a foreign country on Putin's behalf. The intercepts of Russians moaning to their families only reinforces this.I don't know why people bother trying to understand if the morale is high or low. Our guess is as good as any really. I also don't think it matters so much in modern warfare. The technology is so high the man behind the machine hardly matters unless they are completely demoralized or something.
shamans
Thinks you can get an STD from flirting.
The tweet above contradicts what you're saying. Yeah motivation is used as a tool in war and believing the enemy is demoralized is one of the war propaganda tools currently being used by both sides right now but it's pointless to speculate if you want an accurate answer.Not only does it matter, it can be pivotal in how a war is executed. Much of the fighting on the eastern front is in close quarters - town by town, street by street. Ukrainians motivated to fight and die to protect their country is therefore far more powerful than Russian kids being threatened with jail if they don't want to fight in a foreign country on Putin's behalf. The intercepts of Russians moaning to their families only reinforces this.
If all you subscribe to is one side of stories you are going to hear how the enemy is shattered right now. A few intercepts doesn't prove or disprove anything in army of thousands. There are similar reports about how volunteers that came to Ukraine are shocked to see how much of a mess it is (again by randos on twitter)
We can't know and I don't know on what basis you can conclude they are "light years ahead" in terms of morale.